M.Y.EQBAL,J. - (1.) THE petitioners have prayed for quashing the orders passed by the Sub -Divisional Officer and the Deputy Commissioner, Godda and also the Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka whereby in purported exercise of power under the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949 cancelled the mutation in respect of the land which was done in favour of the petitioners as far back as in 1972 vide mutation case No. 62/1971 -72.
(2.) THE petitioners case is that the land comprised within Jamabandi No. 16 of Mauza Billari measuring an area of 6 Bigha 14 Katha and 2 Dhurs was originally recorded in the name of Mostt. Champa wife of Bhukhan Chamar in the last survey settlement record. Mostt. Champa died is -sueless in the year 1937 and as such the then Pradhan of the village settled the land with Bhelu Harijan and Rohin Harijan who were of the same community of the same village. The said Pradhan also fixed the rent for the aforesaid land and started realizing rent from the settlee. After the death of Bhelu Harijan his son Raju Harijan and Rohit Harijan filed an application before the Circle Officer, Godda for mutating the land and opening of Khata in their names. The Circle Officer after holding an inquiry mutated the land in favour of Raju Harijan son of Bhelu Harijan vide mutation case No. 62/1971 -72. The petitioners further case is that they being the heirs and successors came in possession of the land and exercised all acts of possession without any objection from any person, All of a sudden in the year 1990 on the basis of report submitted by the Circle Officer the Sub -Divisional Officer initiated a proceeding for cancellation of the order of mutation which was done as far back as in the year 1972. Consequently the impugned orders were passed by the Sub -Divisional Officer and the same was affirmed in appeal and revision by the Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division and appeal and revision respectively filed by the petitioners. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents wherein it is stated that although in the year 1971 -72 the name of Rohit Harijan and Rohan Harijan was mutated in mutation case No. 62/1971 -72 but in 1990 on inquiry it was found by the Circle Officer that settlement made by the Pradhan was irregular. Accordingly the Circle Officer recommended for cancellation of order of settlement. According to the respondent the Pradhan had no jurisdiction to issue receipts with regard of Fauti land in as much as the land could not have been settled with the predecessor in interest of the petitioner without obtaining prior permission of the Deputy Commissioner.
(3.) I have heard Mr. Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the State.;